Have hard drives improved over the years?

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Who said anything about a dual core? You can get a quad core for less than $150 these days.

I did. If I'm making a build for a client for $400, I'm faced to either get a Celeron E3400 and a 120GB SSD or an Athlon II X4 and a 1TB Spinpoint F3. For me it's an easy choice. You can easily add an SSD in some years, but it's a PITA and a waste of money to three years later have to get a new CPU and motherboard due to it being insufficient. Getting the Quad-Core is a much better way to future-proof.

 

[exdeath]

If someone wants a $400 system I tell them get a Dell or something. I can't build a competitive system in that price range, especially if you are talking genuine software licenses, free printer, free monitor, warranty, no aggregate shipping charges, bulk purchasing power, etc. I need $800-1200 range before I can start making a difference and make it worth building in pieces. At $400 they are getting a piece of crap whether I build it or not.

 

[tigersty1e]

more importantly, they are more reliable.

 

[M0RPH]

Well I'm not surprised this thread has turned into an ssd lovefest... most of the enthusiasts around here have a big hard-on for ssds and tend to exaggerate the benefits of an ssd vs current hard drives. The typical user won't feel that huge of a difference... they are not rebooting and opening/closing programs all day long.

120GB ssd still costs $200 vs $50 for a 320GB/7200 hard drive. That's $150 added to the cost of a system and with a typical person only needing a $400-500 pc, that's a lot. As LOL has been saying, modern hard drives are already fast enough for most people.

Obviously for an enthusiast an ssd is the way to go.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Obviously for an enthusiast an ssd is the way to go.

I dunno, I've tried them, and I honestly don't see the point of the hype. For my usage, they really don't seem to make that much of a difference to me. Especially bootup. I did a test with a 64GB Sandforce SSD on an AMD quad-core, and my single-core laptop with a slow 5400 RPM laptop drive was within 2s of it when it comes to bootup times. 2s, big freaking deal.

 

[dclive]

You're trolling. It couldn't be clearer. I already answered this TWICE. It was a failure because it failed to meet their expectations, which was for it to be an industry standard. They were hoping that people would go for it because it was faster than USB 1, and they used video as an example of advantages it had and how it could be well implemented there. It didn't become an industry standard. Nor did all-it-ones, which they were saying would be the future.

I've searched for several keywords you've used in the first sentences and don't see anything; I don't think you've really answered this. Thanks for finally doing so.

How did FW/AIO fail to meet 'their expectations' - do you have Steve saying in 5 years he expected all makes to cancel all other designs and buses and move to AIO and FW? What gives you that absurd meaning of the word "failure"? Is Porsche a failure because not everyone copied their designs? That's absurd.

You have entirely unrealistic expectations of what Apple's designs were and what 'success' criteria existed in them. Apple's success with the AIO means they keep carrying it and selling it; similarly with FW400/800. It's just another bus; it's mostly come and gone with the video camcorder moving to other buses, but it's still available and used by those that want it; that's not a failure.

What would you define success as? It's not as if Apple made $10 per vendor that implemented Firewire; what should they care about who else implemented it or if it vanquished another bus standard?

Your entire argument (WRT FW/AIO) has no basis.

 

[dclive]

Probably not. The limiting factor for HDDs is transactions per second, or IOs per second (IOPS), and modern drives are no faster than older ones. In fact, you probably get similar IOPS numbers out of a contemporary 7200rpm drive as you would get out of a 7200rpm drive from the mid 1990s (ie: Seagate Barracuda).

SSD is where its at. Or RAID-1. The aim of HDD manufacturers on 7200rpm drives has been to reduce unit cost in the past few years, not improve performance. Even 10k / 15krpm drives are soon to lose market share or die out as SSDs take their place, especially in the enterprise.

Exactly. We're looking at SSD in our enterprise; it's now being considered. It's just THAT much of a difference.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I've searched for several keywords you've used in the first sentences and don't see anything; I don't think you've really answered this. Thanks for finally doing so.

How did FW/AIO fail to meet 'their expectations' - do you have Steve saying in 5 years he expected all makes to cancel all other designs and buses and move to AIO and FW? What gives you that absurd meaning of the word "failure"? Is Porsche a failure because not everyone copied their designs? That's absurd.

You have entirely unrealistic expectations of what Apple's designs were and what 'success' criteria existed in them. Apple's success with the AIO means they keep carrying it and selling it; similarly with FW400/800. It's just another bus; it's mostly come and gone with the video camcorder moving to other buses, but it's still available and used by those that want it; that's not a failure.

What would you define success as? It's not as if Apple made $10 per vendor that implemented Firewire; what should they care about who else implemented it or if it vanquished another bus standard?

Your entire argument (WRT FW/AIO) has no basis.

Setting an industry standard doesn't mean you have to cancel any other products. I already told you, Steve believed that integration in the all-in-one was the way forward because it was simpler in comparison to normal desktops. Thing is, that failed; his vision failed. It made no impact on the market. FireWire 400 didn't become an industry standard like Apple wanted for it to, and just because they released a successor doesn't mean anything. If anything, FireWire 800 is further proof that FireWire failed because it got even less usage than 400. When you set goals for a product and it fails completely to meet them, it failed.

Now you'll probably comment with some BS about me not answering like you always do even though it's been THREE times since I've addressed the question. You're now in my ignore list.

Oh, and when you're making arguments, it's good to at least have a context of what you're talking about. All-in-one isn't "a design", it's a form factor.

 

[dclive]

Setting an industry standard doesn't mean you have to cancel any other products. I already told you, Steve believed that integration in the all-in-one was the way forward because it was simpler in comparison to normal desktops. Thing is, that failed; his vision failed. It made no impact on the market. FireWire 400 didn't become an industry standard like Apple wanted for it to, and just because they released a successor doesn't mean anything. If anything, FireWire 800 is further proof that FireWire failed because it got even less usage than 400. When you set goals for a product and it fails completely to meet them, it failed.

Now you'll probably comment with some BS about me not answering like you always do even though it's been THREE times since I've addressed the question. You're now in my ignore list.

How did his vision fail? The iMac line is a commercial success for the Mac. Next you'll tell me Porsche has failed because every car sold isn't a Porsche. We both know you're being silly.

Firewire succeeded as the main method to link camcorders to computers for about 10 years. How you define that as a failure is a mystery. Just because something isn't used anymore doesn't mean it's a failure; it simply means it served its' purpose and the market moved on - but for 10 years, Firewire was the standard for that need.

When you have actual logic to back up anything you say, rather than automatically positing that everything from Apple is a failure, get back to us. Until then, you are just attacking Apple. (And me, for that matter.)

 

[dclive]

Oh, and when you're making arguments, it's good to at least have a context of what you're talking about. All-in-one isn't "a design", it's a form factor.

http://www.apple.com/imac/design.html

You make it so easy.

"And the DESIGN philosophy remains the same: an all-in-one that’s as powerful as it is beautiful."

"The all-in-one DESIGN of the first flat-panel iMac cleaned up the desktop."

Maybe Apple doesn't understand English either...

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I already told you how his vision failed. If you can't read that's your problem. Saying an iMac is a commercial success for a Mac is like saying... nothing. Apple products were selling so little that just the mere fact that something wasn't a complete trainwreck was at the time okay. In the end, they failed to establish all-in-one as an industry standard form factor, nor did it make any significant impact in the computer market. Same as FireWire more or less.

And yes, I'm clearly posting that Apple is a failure. Look here, for example:

Apple's changes and breakthroughs come from their consumer electronics market. That includes the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad. Saying that Apple has been recently successful when it comes to sales or setting changes that the industry follows in computers is laughable.

Macs don't really matter as far as mainstream computers go. Their big sales are in the iPad, iPhone and iPod markets. Why you can't accept this and keep grasping at straws is beyond me. Use another argument with a mainstream OEM. Most consumers don't care about Macs.

What Apple does in the market of computers is mostly irrelevant except for a few things as we've been able to see from past history. The same cannot be said for their consumer products like the iPod and iPhone, though, since they've had a huge impact.

At this point I think it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt that you're a troll. You make horrible arguments, when people counter you tell them that's not an argument, and then you go on to repeat several times people don't answer your question even though it was answered THREE times. Not only that, but when called on your BS, you fail to admit you're wrong. Give it up.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

http://www.apple.com/imac/design.html

You make it so easy.

"And the DESIGN philosophy remains the same: an all-in-one that’s as powerful as it is beautiful."

"The all-in-one DESIGN of the first flat-panel iMac cleaned up the desktop."

Maybe Apple doesn't understand English either...

Using marketing speak as a valid argument.

All-in-one is a form factor. If it were a design, Sony wouldn't have an AIO that looks different. That's as stupid as saying that ultra-portable is a design. No, it's a form factor. A form factor can have different designs.

You're extremely dumb. I sincerely regret hitting that "View Post" button.

 

[dclive]

I already told you how his vision failed. If you can't read that's your problem. Saying an iMac is a commercial success for a Mac is like saying... nothing. Apple products were selling so little that just the mere fact that something wasn't a complete trainwreck was at the time okay. In the end, they failed to establish all-in-one as an industry standard form factor, nor did it make any significant impact in the computer market. Same as FireWire more or less.

I'm sorry, but that's just not correct. Asus, MSI, HP, Acer, and most other major makes are copying the AIO form factor. All the camcorder players, from about 1999 to 2009 or so (and to a lesser extent, even today) used firewire in their camcorders. To say either is a failure is foolish; there is no other way to look at it.

And yes, I'm clearly posting that Apple is a failure. Look here, for example:
At this point I think it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt that you're a troll. You make horrible arguments, when people counter you tell them that's not an argument, and then you go on to repeat several times people don't answer your question even though it was answered THREE times. Not only that, but when called on your BS, you fail to admit you're wrong. Give it up.

You ought to learn what a failure is. And a niche of a niche market, while you're at it. It would change how you post by 180 degrees.

 

[dclive]

Using marketing speak as a valid argument.

All-in-one is a form factor. If it were a design, Sony wouldn't have an AIO that looks different. That's as stupid as saying that ultra-portable is a design. No, it's a form factor. A form factor can have different designs.

You're extremely dumb. I sincerely regret hitting that "View Post" button.

Yep, and here we have it, folks, highly predictable - Apple doesn't know English either; LOL_Wut_Axel's English is the only method that's correct. On cue.

Here's Wikipedia. I'm sure they're wrong too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design

Design as a noun informally refers to a plan or convention for the construction of an object or a system (as in architectural blueprints, engineering drawing, business process, circuit diagrams and sewing patterns)
...
More formally, design has been defined as follows.
(noun) a specification of an object, manifested by an agent, intended to accomplish goals, in a particular environment, using a set of primitive components, satisfying a set of requirements, subject to constraints;
(verb, transitive) to create a design, in an environment (where the designer operates)[3

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Seeing you grasp at straws is incredibly funny. Again, all-in-one is not a design. There's been many implementations of it, as you can see from the iMac G4 and how they later changed the design in the G5 that resembles what they have now. It's not a design; it's a form factor.

And I do know what a niche of a niche is. As of now, the MacBook Air represents a niche compared to the sales of the other Macs. Macs are already a niche, hence a niche of a niche. If it goes to being the majority of Apple laptops sold in some years, then it'll simply be a niche.

Just because other manufacturers made AIOs doesn't mean anything since, as you can see, their sales are meager, even less so that the iMac, a computer which sells in very small volume. It's not an industry standard and Apple failed in their vision. If we were to take what Steve wanted in 1998, you'd be seeing AIOs being used throughout schools, offices, and by normal users more than normal desktops.

 

[dclive]

Seeing you grasp at straws is incredibly funny. Again, all-in-one is not a design. There's been many implementations of it, as you can see from the iMac G4 and how they later changed the design in the G5 that resembles what they have now. It's not a design; it's a form factor.

And I do know what a niche of a niche is. As of now, the MacBook Air represents a niche compared to the sales of the other Macs. Macs are already a niche, hence a niche of a niche. If it goes to being the majority of Apple laptops sold in some years, then it'll simply be a niche.

Just because other manufacturers made AIOs doesn't mean anything since, as you can see, their sales are meager, even less so that the iMac, a computer which sells in very small volume. It's not an industry standard and Apple failed in their vision. If we were to take what Steve wanted in 1998, you'd be seeing AIOs being used throughout schools, offices, and by normal users more than normal desktops.

...all of which has absolutely nothing to do with AIOs being a failure, nor anything to do with firewire being a failure.

Hint: Neither are. Unless you're redefining failure. Care to define it again for us? Please be sure to clarify why Porsche isn't a failure, while you're at it.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

...all of which has absolutely nothing to do with AIOs being a failure, nor anything to do with firewire being a failure.

Hint: Neither are. Unless you're redefining failure. Care to define it again for us? Please be sure to clarify why Porsche isn't a failure, while you're at it.

Already defined it, and I already gave you my arguments as to why its a failure several times. If you can't read that's your problem.

I've already fed you enough. Your trolling stops here.

 

[dclive]

Already defined it, and I already gave you my arguments as to why its a failure several times. If you can't read that's your problem.

I've already fed you enough. Your trolling stops here.

Sure. When you have a few minutes to come up with a reason for why the entire camcorder industry depended on Firewire for about 10 years and how you can link that to "failure", get back to us.

And when you can tell why the "failure" of All-in-One is being duplicated by MSI, HP, IBM/Lenovo, Acer, Asus, and the other big makes, and how that constitutes "failure", again, please get back to us.

Until then, we'll have to agree that you don't know what "failure" means.